This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gross, A. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science

Department of Rhetoric at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities in St. Paul, MN 55108, USA

In the public understanding of science, rhetoric has two distinct roles: it is both a theory capable of analysing public understanding and an activity capable of creating it. In its analytical role, rhetoric reveals two dominant models of public understanding: the deficit model and the contextual model. In the deficit model, rhetoric acts in the minor role of creating public understanding by accommodating the facts and methods of science to public needs and limitations. In the contextual model, rhetoric and rhetorical analysis play major roles. Rhetorical analysis provides an independent source of evidence to secure social scientific claims; in addition, it supplies the grounds for a rhetoric of reconstruction, one that reconstitutes the fact and facts of science in the public interest.

Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 3, No. 1, 3-23 (1994)
DOI: 10.1088/0963-6625/3/1/001


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J. Martin-Sempere, B. Garzon-Garcia, and J. Rey-Rocha Scientists' motivation to communicate science and technology to the public: surveying participants at the Madrid Science Fair Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2008; 17(3): 349 - 367. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dingwall and M. Aldridge Television wildlife programming as a source of popular scientific information: a case study of evolution Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 131 - 152. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. D. Schmid Transformation Discourse: Nuclear Risk as a Strategic Tool in Late Soviet Politics of Expertise Science Technology Human Values, July 1, 2004; 29(3): 353 - 376. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Sturgis and N. Allum Science in Society: Re-Evaluating the Deficit Model of Public Attitudes Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2004; 13(1): 55 - 74. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. A. Kirby Scientists on the Set: Science Consultants and the Communication of Science in Visual Fiction Public Understanding of Science, July 1, 2003; 12(3): 261 - 278. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. W. Burns, D. J. O'Connor, and S. M. Stocklmayer Science Communication: A Contemporary Definition Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2003; 12(2): 183 - 202. [PDF]

				B. V. Lewenstein Editorial: A decade of Public Understanding Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2002; 11(1): 1 - 4. [PDF]

				S. Locke The Public Understanding of Science--A Rhetorical Invention Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2002; 27(1): 87 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Locke Golem science and the public understanding of science: from deficit to dilemma Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1999; 8(2): 75 - 92. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Naylor and B. Keogh Science on the Underground: an initial evaluation Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 1999; 8(2): 105 - 122. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Hartman The popularization of science through citizen volunteers Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 1997; 6(1): 69 - 86. [Abstract] [PDF]